About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
MSNBCW 13
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
't been tested against what hezbollah has been which is a much different store ji. >> that's certainly true. hamas fired i believe 4,000 rockets from gaza in a month. if this really does end in a fight with hezbollah in lebanon, hezbollah allegedly has at least 50,000 rockets, much better rockets, too. >> and iron dome could not handle 50,000? >> no way. no. it will help. i think there are 5 iron dome systems in place active at the moment. their goal is to create 13 iron dome systems. it will help a lot. but hundreds of rockets fired a day. it apt going to do that much. >> does this set back peace though in an odd way? if you can build fortresses for israel, then what is the incentive to do a two state solution? >> one of the issues of iron dome, one of the reasons that part of the military was against the iron dome is it was considered to be a defensive weapon. and israel, the military crowd is an offensive army. so they said we're spending money in the wrong place. we shouldn't be worried about defending. we should be worried about winning by creating attacking weapons. so the releva
of more convoys coming from our shipment of arms and nuclear arsenal, from syria to hezbollah. the question will come, what will happen the day after. they are fears in israel that either hezbollah or an agent of al qaeda will try to confiscate the storage of nuclear, chemical arsenal, in the case of these few hours when the regime actually falls. and in that case, israel is considered to have a ground assault into the specific locations of these bunkers. >> to secure the chemical weapons. >> to secure them. and that might i would say that might come in a contradiction with american interests. that would try to form or to support the rebels, without intervening militarily on the ground. and i think that israel wants to be sure that the united states completely approved the israeli point of view that the first priority would be to prevent either hezbollah or al qaeda forces to get hold of the strategic weapons, strategic weapon are the scud missiles and the chemical arsenal. >> from what i'm hearing from american officials, the u.s. might take that action unilaterally on its ow
country that values justice should call hezbollah what it truly is, a terrorist organization. [ cheers and applause ] because the world cannot tolerate an organization that murders innocent civilians, stockpiles rockets to shoot its cities, and supports the massacre of men, women, and children in syria right now. the fact that hezbollah's ally, the assad regime, has stockpiles of chemical weapons only heightens the urgency. we'll continue to cooperate to closely guard against that danger. i've made it clear to bashar al assad and all who follow his orders, we will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons against the syrian people or the transfer of those weapons to terrorists. the world is watching. we will hold you accountable. the syrian people have the right to be freed from the grip of a dictator who would rather kill his own people than relinquish power. assad must go so that syria's future can begin. because true stability in syria depends upon establishing a government that is responsible to its people, one that protects all communities within its borders while making peace with
northern border, iran's proxy, hezbollah, continues to stockpile arms and threaten our civilians while they target innocent people across the world. hezbollah is destroying lebanon and supporting the brutal massacre of the syrian people by president assad. fortunately, the nuclear capacity was destroyed. unfortunately, the arsenal of chemical weapons remain. we cannot -- those weapons to fall in the terrorist hands. it could lead to an epic tragedy. there was an attempt to bring spring to the arab world. it is an arab choice, it is an arab initiative. it may bring peace to the region, freedom to the people, economic growth to the upstates. if realized, it can lead to a better tomorrow. we pray it will become a reality. i believe the real division is between skeptics and those who believe in peace. your voice will encourage belief. you came to us with a clear message that no one should let skepticism win the day. a vision that says clearly that peace is not only a wish but a possibility. i fully support your call. there is no other way to make the future better. there's no better leader
with respect to israel's growing challenges on its borders, particularly in lebanon with hezbollah in the south with gaza and egypt and, of course, with syria. the last thing that the united states wants is for netanyahu and the israeli people the belief that the president does not have his back and they would have to act unilaterally without due american consultation with israelis. >> and we know, michael, that the president is going to be going to ramallah to be talking to president mahmoud abbas. talked to one palestinian legislator who laid out conditions for returning to the negotiating table. either israel puts a six month freeze on the building in the west bank and they don't pursue international criminal court, or they come to some agreement on borders along the pre-1967 lines. do you see in any of this any hope for progress? >> well, unfortunately, not much, chris. i don't think that israel or frankly the united states are going to go along with those preconditions. and i think the only way negotiations are going to get restarted is if they're unconditional. and you know, one thing we
for safekeeping. given the fact hezbollah and any number of terrorist organizations are lurking around one corner or the next of any syrian city, who knows what's going on there. there's no guarantee anyone has control over these weapons. the fact of the matter is putting boots on the ground at this point is not going to solve the problem of where these wmd stockpiles go. >> dana, this has an eerie echo of that other despotic leader, saddam hussein, who used chemical weapons against the kurds in 1996. is this the next desperate act of a man who's about to use power? >> well, let's hope not, martin. and particularly on the tenth anniversary of the iraq war, the administration is certainly being very careful not to be responding to what just may be some half-baked reports that my colleagues are picking up that same element of skepticism that this is something real. but obviously as the ambassador was saying, if this is something real, the administration's previous statements have left very little wiggle room and they will have to respond. so certainly the caution upfront is very justified. >> indee
in harm's way in syria, because it is a syria war. it's hezbollah versus hamas. neither of which are friendly to us. >> again, richard, saying we don't understand the culture, when you look back ten years ago tonight, was we went into this, look at the costs. $1.7 trillion. >> right. >> benefits owed to war veterans, $490 billion. i mean, how can republicans who put this war on a credit card now say we need to tighten our belt and cut programs for the poor and working class? >> that's a great point. you know, the bush administration fired the economic adviser who said that the iraq war would cost about $100 billion. because they thought it was too much. they got it wrong about iraq. they also said, by the way, the iraq that had been invaded by america would become an ally against iran. they got that wrong, too. it's not just about the cost. strategic judgments were wrong. when dick cheney says it's more important to be successful than to be liked, he wasn't successful. his premise failed. from the beginning it failed. in the middle it failed and in the end. >> he certainly wasn't
and advanced conventional weapons reaching the wrong hands. wrong hands could be hezbollah in lebanon. an ally of assad. regime of damascus. or opposition groups that may be outside the realm of what the intelligence community knows about. this information is shared and israelis said they would react again and have reacted by military in lebanon. beth parties are very concerned about what is happening in syria and of course chemical weapons are first among them. i think this is a very volatile situation that could develop any week as we saw yesterday with the latest report. >> andrea mitchell was reporting how this could be a new beginning for netanyahu and obama. how there was more warmth between them or less after chill between them might be a better way of phrasing it. but i wonder to the extent that true, how much do you think that has to do with the simple fact that obama was re-elected last year? so much of the frostiness in the first term seemed to be na netanyahu was basically betting that obama would be a one-term president. betting on romney victory. here is the re-elected more confi
's grave concern about the transfer of chemical or other weapons systems to terrorists. such as hezbollah. that might be used against israel. the assad regime must understand they will be held accountable for the use of chemical weapons or their transfer to terrorists. and finally, we continued our close consultation on iran. we agree that a nuclear armed iran would be a threat to the region. a threat to the world. and potentially an skoesten shl threat to israel. we do not have policy of containment when it comes to a nuclear iran. our policy is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we prefer to resolve this diplomatically. and there is still time to do so. iran's leaders must understand, however, that they have to meet their international obligations and meanwhile the international community will continue to increase pressure on the iranian government. the united states will continue to consult closely with israel. on next steps and i will repeat all options are on the table. we will do what is necessary to prevent iran from getting the world's worst weapons. meeting none of
and the opposition. it is a regional war by proxy. you have rapp and iraq and hezbollah supporting him. on the other hand you have turkey and qatar. not only a regional war by proxy. you have russia and the united states. i would argue that president barack obama has been reluctant to intervene directly by either providing arms to the opposition or sending american boots on the ground. what i like to see is a concerted effort on the part of the united states, leading the effort to really broker a political settlement, a diplomatic solution. there is no military solution in syria. syria is not libya. even though i would argue that the rebels will ultimately win there particular struggle in the long term, we don't know. one or two years. at the end of it, there will be no syria as we know it. there will be no state as we know it. and more important from my point of view, there will be the social fabric, the diversity would most likely be destroyed. not to mention the that i willover effects from syria into will he be none and jordan into iraq and even into turkey. >> wow! a dramatic scene that you pai
from outside from iran on -- and hezbollah on one side and from saudi arabia, qatar and other states on the other. if there's any hope of diffusing the conflict, one way is going to have to deal with the issues of iranian support. iran is deeply concerned because syria is the major foothold in the arab world. there's a long standing syria through the decline or democrat myself of the assad regime, which i think is inevitable, will be a serious blow to iran. >> so if you have washington, sir, on one side of the scale and tehran on the other, who does baghdad more closely align with? >> well, our hope is, of course, that it will be a truly democratic regime which will be primarily loyal to the interests of the people in iraq and that their views will be consistent with others in supporting and strengthening democratic institutions. but as with many of the other countries in the middle east, there are a whole series of conflicting interests there and it will play out over a long period of time. but our interest is in democratic institutions, democratic societies who will serve their peo
consequences and fear of spilling out and hezbollah looms large. >> wish we had more historical depth how we look at this. this is the third arab state to be devastated by a civil war. without pointing fingers of blame, lebanon for 15 years was devastated by civil war. foreign armies, foreign intelligence services. after the u.s. invasion in 2003 iraq went through a different but similar process. >> let's point fingers, please. >> in case of iraq we can point finger at the bush administration, it's very clear. it's not just displacement of millions of people. it's not just people being slaughtered which is happening in syria. it's the deconstruction of stooss of state, the idea of a state of law, all -- >> the worst elements of society. >> exactly. giving free rein to people whose objectives and aims and means are horrific as far as, including most syrians are concerned or most iraqis and lebanese were concerned and stopping this as quickly as possible is something we should be concerned about. as this continues, the radicalization and extremism gets worse. >> the ripple effect, the reason w
's not about shiite and sunni and hezbollah. i think the real urgent issue i think they have to move forward because we are witness to a great tragedy in that part of the world. >> but, alex, it always turns back to the united states. afghanistan, after 9/11. iraq when, you know, a lot of our allies, other than french, the french were saying, got weapons of mass destruction we have to do about it now in syria. do we continue to exist in the middle of an international order where nothing is done unless it's kids from kansas and california and upstate new york and florida that do the fighting? >> yeah. i think this is one of those moments where, i think, you can almost sense the internal conflict in the white house giving the agagenocide. i don't know how the president will commit any troops given the state of affair of our troops when they return home, 600,000 veterans are stale waiting for their claims to send more boys and women, men and women over there. it would not seem to be any actual support for that. at the same time, how do you reconcile that with the blood shed? 70,000 people are d
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)